Most of the R&D work that makes Apple and Microsoft products wildly profitable around the world is done in the U.S.. But the IRS seldom manages to collect its 35% tax on corporate profits from sales abroad due to blatant tax evasion tactics.

As I wrote in 2011:

Yesterday, Microsoft announced it had made net income of $5.87 billion in the latest quarter, but had reduced its tax rate from 25% a year ago to 7%. Annualized, that would be about $4 billion incremental in tax avoidance just over the last year. You’re probably saying to yourself, “Hey, I’d like to reduce my tax rate by 72% from 2010 to 2011, too! What are some tips from Microsoft on how I could do this?” …

You see, Microsoft has over 40,000 employees in the state of Washington in the United States. But they don’t actually physically burn on to disks the software they develop. Instead, Microsoft, has a manufacturing plant in Puerto Rico employing 185 people that gets credited in Microsoft’s books with a lion’s share of Microsoft’s Western hemisphere revenue and profits. It’s making disks that’s the really important thing that Microsoft does.

Despite all you’ve heard about Microsoft being a software company, they are actually a manufacturing company, at least for tax accounting purposes. To the IRS, Microsoft is basically a Puerto Rican, Irish and Singaporean industrial goliath with a money-losing R&D outpost in Redmond, WA.

The Border-Adjustment Tax is something the Trump Administration has been considering. Cut the corporate income tax from 35% to 20%, but then impose a smart BAT to actually collect the 20%.

That sounds like a good idea but I have to confess that the three words “Border-Adjustment Tax” make my eyes glaze over. “Adjustment” is one of the most boring words in the English language, wholly lacking in moral urgency.

These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.

Give me a goddam break with this nonsense. People like you start up everytime corporate welfare and corporations' tax evasion are mentioned, and you pretend as though Ma's Diner and Pa's Garage are being hounded and bankrupted by The Man.

Of all things, taxing imports (just as nearly every other sane nation does; cf. regulating immigration) and clawing back taxes avoided via shady international structuring shenanigans have negligible effects on small, and even many moderately sized, businesses; all these measures would so is force the kleptomaniacs running Microsoft, Wal-Mart, ExxonMobil, etc. to pay their damned taxes – the horror!

If I can afford to have bastards in Washington confiscate a third of my income and spend it to educate illegal aliens, feed lazy Negroes, and subsidise the businesses of shiftless Hindoos and Chinamen, it's high time the likes of William Gates, Jr. – so keen to foist these invaders upon me and give my patrimony to them – cut back on their mansions and golfing.

When I hear nonsense about what these corporations can and cannot afford I pull their Form 10-Ks. Because unless and until the soundrels in the C-suite are making, oh, I dunno, let's be generous and say $5,000,000.00 annually, then I don't wanna hear about insufficient profits, a need for layoffs and tax-breaks, or any of that other baloney.

And I don't brook the nonsense that all corporate taxes are "double taxation" just because the natural persons owning and operating the corporations are also taxed as individuals. When those natural persons on the boards of directors and in the C-suite become personally – joint and severally – liable for the corporations' actions, we can discuss whether any double-taxation is occurring and any other ways in which the poor corporation is put upon.

Its one thing to work away long hours in finance in some cubicle in Wall St. You are there to make money, your boss is there to make money, and everyone is on the same page.

Must be excruciating to do the same in a "idealistic/hippie" company. Your bosses are there to make money and they hired you for one reason: to make them money. But you must pretend you are there to improve the world and you don't care about money.

And since its not about the money, you shouldn't care about how much you're paid and shouldn't mind the long hours w/o extra pay. Right?

Plus your boss is an idealist who supports leftwing causes like immigration. You may notice that immigration undercuts your wages and enriches him. But you'd only notice that if you care about money which as an idealist, you shouldn't!

I think that Apple sold their IP to a foreign subsidiary back in the 1980s, when it was worth much less. Maybe they got away with valuing it at less than its fair value, since that can always be argued when it's not an arm's-length transaction. But if Apple's value in its IP, it stands to reason that a company that bought all Apple's IP rights in the 80s would be earning the bulk of Apple's profits today.

It could have just as easily gone the other way. Sell your IP, pay US taxes on the gains, and then that IP turns out to be worthless, but you can't shelter US profits from US tax because the money-losing IP is off shore.

I don't get what's going on with Trump. I realize he's facing many obstacles, but I'm confused by some of the things he's doing. Ilana Mercer said he hasn't even cleared out a lot of Obama administration holdovers. It's getting frustrating.

Foggy Bottom is somewhere to the left of Angela Davis and mostly unfirable. We can assume this is their own initiative.

That said Mike Pence and the other ex-Bushies seem to have completely taken over. It's gotten to the point that "White House officials" are constantly being quoted saying administration policy is exactly the opposite of everything he said in the campaign. Paul Ryan looks like one of the good guys compared to "White House officials."

...the Administration is going to admit 900 refugees a week for the remainder of the fiscal year which ends September 30th...As of yesterday, that would mean that 62,482 could be the expected total. The average since 9/11 has been around 64,000.

That's roughly a city the size of Iowa City, Iowa every year of 3rd-world "refugees" being brought to the US at taxpayer expense.

No, we should reduce the tax rate companies pay when operating here in the USA. That way, they don’t need to offshore every danged thing. Also, the workers would be paying taxes from what the companies pay as well. And they would get off Medicaid because they would be working.

I was always impressed with California’s State Board of Equalization, the name given to the agency that collects sales taxes, fees, alcohol and tobacco taxes etc. I think New York has a ‘Board of Equalization’ too. With just a few letter changes we could have a Board of Border Equalization that would, like California and New York, make it very hard to claim your income was earned someplace else when your fat hiney resides in California or New York.

Democrats always like to call things fair. Mentally it’s very effective and disarming. The government isn’t stealing from you and coercing you, they are just making things fair. Border Fairness Tax – BFT.

With this horrorshow, plus the points made earlier about his not doing anything about the H1-B and refugee rackets, even as he obsesses about health insurance and corporate taxes (neither issue was the reason we elected him), I want my money back and a stipend for the work I did to get the rat elected.

He's proving to be just like all the rest. His comparisons of himself to President Jackson are risible, and I think the biggest reason for his venality is to be found therein: Jackson was an orphan who made good and fought for the common man because he was the common man; Trump, despite his affected affinity for the common man, was born with a silver spoon in his ass.

Consider me to have officially disembarked from the train. We have been had.

I don't see how it fits into Border Fairness, but this is a really good idea in general. Just tag "diversity" into every damn thing, don't even bother to rationalize it, just attach the word to every bill, proposal, etc blog posts signed off with "this would be good for diversity". Watch the screeching in response. Before long diversity could be dead as a buzzword as they would be publicly arguing what we know already: diversity means less White.

A Border Adjustment Tax that applies the same rate to all imports seems to be inconsistent with Trump’s idea that we should negotiate our trade deals on a country-by-country basis, to deal with countries like China and Mexico with whom we have massive trade deficits and threaten tariffs against them if necessary.

The tax system is so complex it is impossible to write laws in such a way that smart lawyers cannot game the system. I once worked on an airliner lease deal where the same 747 was considered owned by a Japanese Airline under Japanese Law and by an American Bank under American law. Two companies got to deduct the same airliner. The concept of “income” alone is practically metaphysical. You spend weeks in tax law trying to define income.

The government should run on tariffs, user fees, sale of resources on public land (and the sale of public land to reduce the debt), The USG tolerates titanic inequality and unfairness just because the income tax raises so much revenue. Colleges look at your balance sheet before they price the product – and so does the USG. Price discrimination is a great way to subvert the benefits of supply and demand intersection on price.

The only morally applicable tax on citizens under the precepts of the constitution are property taxes. Of course non-citizens are a whole other story. Plus if Hamilton's federalist papers arguments are correct the practical, morality is irrelevant here, purpose of America is plutocracy and old money plutocracy at that. Ultimately the tax system should then be made so complex that only connected NY&DC insiders aren't simply criminalized by it. Which is roughly the current position. Huh, almost as if Steve's point about all social and political movements for the last several decades being some kind of boon for hustlers has merit.

"... When the Swedish government sent doctors and sociologists to visit Kosovo, Serbia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, and Kyrgyzstan, to find out if the illness was a culturally specific way of reacting to trauma, local doctors said that they had never heard of such symptoms."

Just wait for domestic SJ Jihadis and maybe science-wise flaky, but by the triple parentheses certificate empowered Head &Soulder Examiners, to start toying with uppgivenhetssyndrom facts & figures in America....

An easy way to show that so-called conservatives are just managerial state fluffers is to ask why we even have a corporate income tax at all. Taxes on a C-Corp are just a pass through, paid by employees and customers. The shareholders are not paying these taxes.

Eliminating corporate taxes entirely would go a long way toward restoring economic health and cleaning up corruption in Washington. Most of what politicians do these days is auction off tax breaks to corporate lobbying forms. Get rid of the tax and you get rid of this activity and restore a bit of trust in our political institutions.

That’s why it will never happen. The bust-out is all that matters. The so-called Right is just as dirty as the Left. More so as the Left has the ideological ineptitude as an excuse. The so-called conservative claim to know better.

I agree. If there must be taxes, and I reluctantly admit there must be some revenue source for government, it should all be sales-related. All of it. No income, no property, no inheritance, no corporate. All sales.

I don’t like the word “borders”. It makes my eyes glaze over. Why not use the word tariff?

Or, why not change the rules regarding which corporate tax rates apply to overseas business so that you can’t escape U.S. corporate taxes by going overseas? If a company chooses to no longer be an American company in order to sidestep this rule, then impose some kind of penalty for no longer being an American business. It’s probably very obvious I’m not familiar with corporate tax rules, but it would be nice to have clearcut rules that make it difficult for corporations and their armies of tax lawyers to game U.S. tax laws.

Replacing the corporate tax with a VAT on all goods and services fully reimbursed to the payor up to the amount of individual income taxes paid by employees and shareholders/owners on income from the payor.

It could rightly be called The American Worker Relief Tax since it would eliminate the longstanding disadvantages American workers have faced from both foreign labor and automation.

All would be well if they can get the word diversity into their tax plan.

I don’t see how it fits into Border Fairness, but this is a really good idea in general. Just tag “diversity” into every damn thing, don’t even bother to rationalize it, just attach the word to every bill, proposal, etc blog posts signed off with “this would be good for diversity”. Watch the screeching in response. Before long diversity could be dead as a buzzword as they would be publicly arguing what we know already: diversity means less White.

Replacing the corporate tax with a VAT on all goods and services fully reimbursed to the payor up to the amount of individual income taxes paid by employees and shareholders/owners on income from the payor.

It could rightly be called The American Worker Relief Tax since it would eliminate the longstanding disadvantages American workers have faced from both foreign labor and automation.

In principle this sounds like a good idea. In practice the tax is a technical nightmare. The reason for the BAT is that a straight tariff will attract WTO scrutiny the BAT is supposed to mirror a VAT. The way a VAT works is that you net your input tax credits (tax incurred when a purchase of a supply is made) against the tax you collect (tax collected when you sell a good or service). An exporter gets the credits but doesn’t collect tax on sales abroad. Therefore exports are exempt from VAT. However, if you import a taxable supply into a country VAT is levied on this import. Therefore all goods and services are treated equally. The BAT tries to do this with the corporate income tax base but without the crediting mechanism of the VAT system. So the accounting problem is lining up income with the destination of consumption & dealing with inter-entity domestic sales which end up abroad (USco1 sells widget to USCo2 which makes a chair sold to Latvia – in order to properly work USCo1′s corporate income tax should not build up in the cost of producing the chair). Also the BAT is not accounting for foreign corporate income tax. If the rate of tax in France is 20% and the rate in the U.S. is 20% there should be no BAT. However if the rate in Indonesia is 5% the BAT should be 15%. The thing is unworkable from a technical perspective imo.

I don't like the word "borders". It makes my eyes glaze over. Why not use the word tariff?

Or, why not change the rules regarding which corporate tax rates apply to overseas business so that you can't escape U.S. corporate taxes by going overseas? If a company chooses to no longer be an American company in order to sidestep this rule, then impose some kind of penalty for no longer being an American business. It's probably very obvious I'm not familiar with corporate tax rules, but it would be nice to have clearcut rules that make it difficult for corporations and their armies of tax lawyers to game U.S. tax laws.

One thing that strikes me about this is how different our tax treatment of foreign individual earnings is from foreign corporate earnings. My understanding (I’m no expert here so please correct if needed) is that individual foreign earnings are taxed in the foreign country, but if that is less than the applicable American taxes the difference is owed to the IRS. That seems very different from corporate foreign earnings where the approach seems to be: “oh, you don’t owe any tax in Ireland, cool, you don’t owe us anything either.”

Could someone who understands US/International tax law please help me understand this?

Only the US(and possibly some really nasty African dictators) tax its citizens abroad. All other countries only tax people living in the country(regardless of citizenship).

As to why your corporation aren't taxed on worldwide income but people are: corporations are more important than people in the eyes of the American legislators. Well, it's true in many places but since US taxes its citizens worldwide it's visible.

Btw,

why Microsoft apparently earns its money in Puerto Rico isn't as strange as it sounds. There's really nothing strange about them producing their CDs there and then selling them. It's just that it seems odd that there's no cost for the PR entity of buying the software they're selling. Even if they're still Microsoft they have to pay for the software anyway. Typically corporations are adept at finding hole in the tax code so it's likely something like this that happened. Transfer pricing rules should prevent this but of course Microsoft is smarter than the government.

I don't see how it fits into Border Fairness, but this is a really good idea in general. Just tag "diversity" into every damn thing, don't even bother to rationalize it, just attach the word to every bill, proposal, etc blog posts signed off with "this would be good for diversity". Watch the screeching in response. Before long diversity could be dead as a buzzword as they would be publicly arguing what we know already: diversity means less White.

This would be good for diversity in America.

#good4diversity

There is a long list of words like that: diversity, equality, fair, equitable, patriot, empowerment, …

If we are going to fantasize, I'd go one step further - let's hope that other developed nations begin to recognize that scarcity is no longer the overriding economic problem in the 21st century. Let's revise the WTO to recognize the value of autarky and economic diversity within a given country. Just as nations can respect each other's borders, we can respect each other's tariffs as well, and recognize that neither our emigrants nor our exporters have any divine right to settle nor sell in other countries.

In short, in a sane world, none of this needs to be hostile. Trade agreements need not be suicide pacts.

When Microsoft was in its early days, it really did sell most of its software on discs instead of via online downloads. Those came later. So they could legitimately claim to be manufacturing something. Once you set up as an X-type of company for tax purposes, it’s kind of hard to change it down the line. Since the original method also is cheaper for Microsoft, they have no incentive to change it.

It’s also true that there vast numbers of Americans who may not own Microsoft stock directly, but who have it as part of their employer-sponsored pension plans. If Microsoft made less money because of higher taxes, its share value would drop, and this would cause a proportionate drop in the value of those pensions. Likewise, the value of those pensions has grown over the last thirty years because they include tech stocks like Microsoft, Apple, etc. If pensions today consisted mainly of stocks in older companies like Sears or Westinghouse (which are heading into bankruptcy) or gas and oil stocks (which have gone downhill badly), or 30-year Treasury bonds paying out 1%, (which is a horrible rate that has not a prayer of keeping up with inflation), they would be in really bad shape.

The thirty-year boom in the tech sector has helped keep America’s middle- and upper-middle classes out of the poor house in its old age. This would not have happened if we had taxed those companies to death. In economics, you can’t tug on one portion of the economy without causing a cascade of effects to appear elsewhere, and many of these effects are almost completely hidden from sight. Liberal economists certainly don’t know much about them. In economics, you don’t kill the goose that lays the golden egg with excess taxes.

Besides, why should anybody, whether a person or a company, have to pay higher taxes? We have an inefficient and spendthrift government that pays for many programs we don’t need. That money is put to better use in our own pockets rather than doing things like paying large salaries to corrupt, third-world nepotistic UN members, or helping put a roof on some town hall in Outer Mongolia, or helping subsidize the 10th child of some black drug addict.

I love your exposure of how Apple plays all the corporate tricks to maximize profits while pretending to be an idealistic, old-hippie company.

Apple has long been the very same Big Brother figure it featured in its its old commercials.

Human nature does not change. Whenever any entity pretends to be better than you -- better than the flawed, clawing, competitive killer that you are -- walk away.

Its one thing to work away long hours in finance in some cubicle in Wall St. You are there to make money, your boss is there to make money, and everyone is on the same page.

Must be excruciating to do the same in a “idealistic/hippie” company. Your bosses are there to make money and they hired you for one reason: to make them money. But you must pretend you are there to improve the world and you don’t care about money.

And since its not about the money, you shouldn’t care about how much you’re paid and shouldn’t mind the long hours w/o extra pay. Right?

Plus your boss is an idealist who supports leftwing causes like immigration. You may notice that immigration undercuts your wages and enriches him. But you’d only notice that if you care about money which as an idealist, you shouldn’t!

I don’t get what’s going on with Trump. I realize he’s facing many obstacles, but I’m confused by some of the things he’s doing. Ilana Mercer said he hasn’t even cleared out a lot of Obama administration holdovers. It’s getting frustrating.

One thing that strikes me about this is how different our tax treatment of foreign individual earnings is from foreign corporate earnings. My understanding (I'm no expert here so please correct if needed) is that individual foreign earnings are taxed in the foreign country, but if that is less than the applicable American taxes the difference is owed to the IRS. That seems very different from corporate foreign earnings where the approach seems to be: "oh, you don't owe any tax in Ireland, cool, you don't owe us anything either."

Could someone who understands US/International tax law please help me understand this?

That seems very different from corporate foreign earnings where the approach seems to be: “oh, you don’t owe any tax in Ireland, cool, you don’t owe us anything either.”

If this is true, then this is what should be changed. It seems like it’s too easy for corporations to game the U.S. Corporate tax code.

One thing that strikes me about this is how different our tax treatment of foreign individual earnings is from foreign corporate earnings. My understanding (I'm no expert here so please correct if needed) is that individual foreign earnings are taxed in the foreign country, but if that is less than the applicable American taxes the difference is owed to the IRS. That seems very different from corporate foreign earnings where the approach seems to be: "oh, you don't owe any tax in Ireland, cool, you don't owe us anything either."

Could someone who understands US/International tax law please help me understand this?

Yeah, this one is unbalanced but it’s mostly an American problem.

Only the US(and possibly some really nasty African dictators) tax its citizens abroad. All other countries only tax people living in the country(regardless of citizenship).

As to why your corporation aren’t taxed on worldwide income but people are: corporations are more important than people in the eyes of the American legislators. Well, it’s true in many places but since US taxes its citizens worldwide it’s visible.

Btw,

why Microsoft apparently earns its money in Puerto Rico isn’t as strange as it sounds. There’s really nothing strange about them producing their CDs there and then selling them. It’s just that it seems odd that there’s no cost for the PR entity of buying the software they’re selling. Even if they’re still Microsoft they have to pay for the software anyway. Typically corporations are adept at finding hole in the tax code so it’s likely something like this that happened. Transfer pricing rules should prevent this but of course Microsoft is smarter than the government.

Give me a goddam break with this nonsense. People like you start up everytime corporate welfare and corporations’ tax evasion are mentioned, and you pretend as though Ma’s Diner and Pa’s Garage are being hounded and bankrupted by The Man.

Of all things, taxing imports (just as nearly every other sane nation does; cf. regulating immigration) and clawing back taxes avoided via shady international structuring shenanigans have negligible effects on small, and even many moderately sized, businesses; all these measures would so is force the kleptomaniacs running Microsoft, Wal-Mart, ExxonMobil, etc. to pay their damned taxes – the horror!

If I can afford to have bastards in Washington confiscate a third of my income and spend it to educate illegal aliens, feed lazy Negroes, and subsidise the businesses of shiftless Hindoos and Chinamen, it’s high time the likes of William Gates, Jr. – so keen to foist these invaders upon me and give my patrimony to them – cut back on their mansions and golfing.

When I hear nonsense about what these corporations can and cannot afford I pull their Form 10-Ks. Because unless and until the soundrels in the C-suite are making, oh, I dunno, let’s be generous and say $5,000,000.00 annually, then I don’t wanna hear about insufficient profits, a need for layoffs and tax-breaks, or any of that other baloney.

And I don’t brook the nonsense that all corporate taxes are “double taxation” just because the natural persons owning and operating the corporations are also taxed as individuals. When those natural persons on the boards of directors and in the C-suite become personally – joint and severally – liable for the corporations’ actions, we can discuss whether any double-taxation is occurring and any other ways in which the poor corporation is put upon.

But how do we ensure these corporations will not leave? How does taxing profits on entities do anything positive other resolve a sense of fairness? Logically, couldn't these corporations just relocate all operations abroad? Couldn't they just pass on the taxes to consumers?

I do not know the answer to these questions, but it would seem as though taxation will not work as planned. Perhaps there are more creative methods than blunt taxation to achieve your ends.

Also, remember, once those taxes are passed, that money is going to flow more towards the people you identified. It's not like it will go to rebuilding rural Michigan.

Nicely done. Can't stand the ancaps who try and ride the tailcoats of every nationalist movement and subvert it with this "open borders are okay as long as it's business instead of a government running our country into the ground."

OT Jerk boy Trump is about to sign a total information awareness act for ISPs to collect and sell all info about web users.

Massive stab in the back here. The mask falls on anti-freedom GOP big brother. And Trump loves it!

Winning!

Maga!

/sarc

With this horrorshow, plus the points made earlier about his not doing anything about the H1-B and refugee rackets, even as he obsesses about health insurance and corporate taxes (neither issue was the reason we elected him), I want my money back and a stipend for the work I did to get the rat elected.

He’s proving to be just like all the rest. His comparisons of himself to President Jackson are risible, and I think the biggest reason for his venality is to be found therein: Jackson was an orphan who made good and fought for the common man because he was the common man; Trump, despite his affected affinity for the common man, was born with a silver spoon in his ass.

Consider me to have officially disembarked from the train. We have been had.

I feel you are a bit impatient. Understandable, but still impatient. We did not elect Trump as a savior, but as the best weapon available to murder the GOP. If Trump fails, the next guy elected will be several more degrees less polished and several degrees more strident. The Swamp will really hate that.

Lmao you were never on the train. You're another crybaby in a line of crybabies around here who wears out his shoulder patting himself on the back when things are good and then hops into his gimp suit at the slightest headwind.

Consider me to have officially disembarked from the train. We have been had.

For someone as bright as you, I am surprised to see you miss the point. Whatever stupidity Trump foists upon us, (and it will come) he kicked out the props under the Potemkin village the establishment constructed. Their charade, even if they coopt Trump, will never be the same. And someone else will notice the opportunity, and seize it.

Trump's flaws are great. And he may do no more good than he has up until now. But his immigration EO's unmasked the judiciary. There will be a price for them to pay. And others will notice.

Don't expect too much from Trump. Be glad for the good he has already done. And when Bannon leaves, or is fired, you will know Trump's corruption has been completed.

Its one thing to work away long hours in finance in some cubicle in Wall St. You are there to make money, your boss is there to make money, and everyone is on the same page.

Must be excruciating to do the same in a "idealistic/hippie" company. Your bosses are there to make money and they hired you for one reason: to make them money. But you must pretend you are there to improve the world and you don't care about money.

And since its not about the money, you shouldn't care about how much you're paid and shouldn't mind the long hours w/o extra pay. Right?

Plus your boss is an idealist who supports leftwing causes like immigration. You may notice that immigration undercuts your wages and enriches him. But you'd only notice that if you care about money which as an idealist, you shouldn't!

Foggy Bottom is somewhere to the left of Angela Davis and mostly unfirable. We can assume this is their own initiative.

That said Mike Pence and the other ex-Bushies seem to have completely taken over. It’s gotten to the point that “White House officials” are constantly being quoted saying administration policy is exactly the opposite of everything he said in the campaign. Paul Ryan looks like one of the good guys compared to “White House officials.”

Give me a goddam break with this nonsense. People like you start up everytime corporate welfare and corporations' tax evasion are mentioned, and you pretend as though Ma's Diner and Pa's Garage are being hounded and bankrupted by The Man.

Of all things, taxing imports (just as nearly every other sane nation does; cf. regulating immigration) and clawing back taxes avoided via shady international structuring shenanigans have negligible effects on small, and even many moderately sized, businesses; all these measures would so is force the kleptomaniacs running Microsoft, Wal-Mart, ExxonMobil, etc. to pay their damned taxes – the horror!

If I can afford to have bastards in Washington confiscate a third of my income and spend it to educate illegal aliens, feed lazy Negroes, and subsidise the businesses of shiftless Hindoos and Chinamen, it's high time the likes of William Gates, Jr. – so keen to foist these invaders upon me and give my patrimony to them – cut back on their mansions and golfing.

When I hear nonsense about what these corporations can and cannot afford I pull their Form 10-Ks. Because unless and until the soundrels in the C-suite are making, oh, I dunno, let's be generous and say $5,000,000.00 annually, then I don't wanna hear about insufficient profits, a need for layoffs and tax-breaks, or any of that other baloney.

And I don't brook the nonsense that all corporate taxes are "double taxation" just because the natural persons owning and operating the corporations are also taxed as individuals. When those natural persons on the boards of directors and in the C-suite become personally – joint and severally – liable for the corporations' actions, we can discuss whether any double-taxation is occurring and any other ways in which the poor corporation is put upon.

I agree with most of what you wrote.

But how do we ensure these corporations will not leave? How does taxing profits on entities do anything positive other resolve a sense of fairness? Logically, couldn’t these corporations just relocate all operations abroad? Couldn’t they just pass on the taxes to consumers?

I do not know the answer to these questions, but it would seem as though taxation will not work as planned. Perhaps there are more creative methods than blunt taxation to achieve your ends.

Also, remember, once those taxes are passed, that money is going to flow more towards the people you identified. It’s not like it will go to rebuilding rural Michigan.

That is a great question for a normal country like Jamaica or even Canada. But the USA has the unusual position of being the largest market, or close to the largest now, and corporations will put up with a lot of inconveniencies to be able to do business in it.

Hyper markets like the USA, and China, are able to do things others can't because of the sheer size of the market. It's why the Chinese are able to strong arm companies into building factories in China that a country like Canada could never do.

It's time the USA takes advantage of this natural advantage that we in fact do have almost every other nation in the world.

We hit them with a suitable penalty for leaving, enough so that it will be more profitable for them to stay here than relocate.

Paying taxes is not going to be harder than facing a 75% punitive offshoring tariff.

You want access to our market? You pay for it by following our rules. We're not a third world country like Venezuela, where such a threat could be laughed off because there's no actual market power behind it. We control one of the world's largest markets in virtually all products.

We have enormous leverage we can apply - and they know it. That's why we'll rarely have to use it once we've made a couple of examples.

Give me a goddam break with this nonsense. People like you start up everytime corporate welfare and corporations' tax evasion are mentioned, and you pretend as though Ma's Diner and Pa's Garage are being hounded and bankrupted by The Man.

Of all things, taxing imports (just as nearly every other sane nation does; cf. regulating immigration) and clawing back taxes avoided via shady international structuring shenanigans have negligible effects on small, and even many moderately sized, businesses; all these measures would so is force the kleptomaniacs running Microsoft, Wal-Mart, ExxonMobil, etc. to pay their damned taxes – the horror!

If I can afford to have bastards in Washington confiscate a third of my income and spend it to educate illegal aliens, feed lazy Negroes, and subsidise the businesses of shiftless Hindoos and Chinamen, it's high time the likes of William Gates, Jr. – so keen to foist these invaders upon me and give my patrimony to them – cut back on their mansions and golfing.

When I hear nonsense about what these corporations can and cannot afford I pull their Form 10-Ks. Because unless and until the soundrels in the C-suite are making, oh, I dunno, let's be generous and say $5,000,000.00 annually, then I don't wanna hear about insufficient profits, a need for layoffs and tax-breaks, or any of that other baloney.

And I don't brook the nonsense that all corporate taxes are "double taxation" just because the natural persons owning and operating the corporations are also taxed as individuals. When those natural persons on the boards of directors and in the C-suite become personally – joint and severally – liable for the corporations' actions, we can discuss whether any double-taxation is occurring and any other ways in which the poor corporation is put upon.

I don't get what's going on with Trump. I realize he's facing many obstacles, but I'm confused by some of the things he's doing. Ilana Mercer said he hasn't even cleared out a lot of Obama administration holdovers. It's getting frustrating.

Yeah, a whole two months, you think he’d be able to erase everything bad that happened before!

I don't expect him to accomplish everything in two months, but it seems as though things are going a bit off course. I don't feel that we're getting clear communication from the Trump Administration, and things feel disjointed.

The letter includes vague references to making changes in a number of areas, including agriculture, government procurement, tax policy, intellectual property, rules of origin for things like car parts, telecommunications, and dispute resolution. It also suggests a mechanism to impose tariffs if imports flood in and threaten U.S. industry.

Trump appears to be using the word “tariff” in his projected changes to NAFTA. He is also attacking Mexican and Canadian tax rebates for goods made in Mexico and Canada for export to the United States.

Combine the lower cost or absence of medical care, lack of environmental regulations in Mexico, and tax rebates in both countries, and it is understandable why companies in the United States would want to relocate to Mexico and Canada to make things to reimport back to the United States. Medical care, environmental regulations, tax rebates … each of these things move revenue from the cost column in the United States to the profit column when production is in Mexico or Canada. And since production was in Mexico and Canada, under NAFTA these goods can be reimported back to the United States tax free.

The original NAFTA agreement appears to have transformed “fly over” America from an industrial giant to forlorn opiate dens. The immigrant and financial services-heavy mega cities on the east and left coasts were apparently comfortable with that arrangement.

Why does the USA get to tax commerce in other countries? What happens if they demand taxes for commerce in the US. What happens if a company balks and leaves the US. What is needed is a tax treaty between the US and the other nation.

Yeah, a whole two months, you think he'd be able to erase everything bad that happened before!

Hi there, Edelman intern!

I don’t expect him to accomplish everything in two months, but it seems as though things are going a bit off course. I don’t feel that we’re getting clear communication from the Trump Administration, and things feel disjointed.

The problem is Trump can't just lay out all of his negotiating positions and plans (see his comments on Obama telegraphing US positions when negotiating overseas).

Remember how chaotic his campaign seemed? It's far too early to be writing him off. I say give him until bad laws actually pass or midterm elections. I think how he plays the midterms will be critical to his success. He really needs more allies in Congress if he wants to get anything done. I also think the threat of taking his complaints to the people for midterms will be a useful cudgel.

“… When the Swedish government sent doctors and sociologists to visit Kosovo, Serbia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, and Kyrgyzstan, to find out if the illness was a culturally specific way of reacting to trauma, local doctors said that they had never heard of such symptoms.”

Just wait for domestic SJ Jihadis and maybe science-wise flaky, but by the triple parentheses certificate empowered Head &Soulder Examiners, to start toying with uppgivenhetssyndrom facts & figures in America….

But how do we ensure these corporations will not leave? How does taxing profits on entities do anything positive other resolve a sense of fairness? Logically, couldn't these corporations just relocate all operations abroad? Couldn't they just pass on the taxes to consumers?

I do not know the answer to these questions, but it would seem as though taxation will not work as planned. Perhaps there are more creative methods than blunt taxation to achieve your ends.

Also, remember, once those taxes are passed, that money is going to flow more towards the people you identified. It's not like it will go to rebuilding rural Michigan.

Let them leave. If they want to sell their wares to the world’s most profitable market, they will pay tariffs like any other foreigner importing things to the U.S.A.

The pretence that no American had gainful employment or otherwise prospered before the rise of the vampire-squid corporatocracy must stop.

They could leave with nothing and would soon create wealth, because they are creators. You, on the other hand, would learn to do without their products and jobs. You think you are entitled to their lives because exactly why . . .

Gates, Bezos, Buffett were not born with billions in their pockets. They may have had access to a few million through family and contacts but lots of people born with a few million never do much with it, let alone provide life enhancing products to people, jobs to tens of thousands of people and wealth to lots of investors and employees. I find it annoying that you think you are entitlds to a big slice of their production because you can demand it.

The business taxes are pertinent to people who create jobs, products and profits. You really think you are entitled to a big slice of that for your health care and retirement?

Give me a goddam break with this nonsense. People like you start up everytime corporate welfare and corporations' tax evasion are mentioned, and you pretend as though Ma's Diner and Pa's Garage are being hounded and bankrupted by The Man.

Of all things, taxing imports (just as nearly every other sane nation does; cf. regulating immigration) and clawing back taxes avoided via shady international structuring shenanigans have negligible effects on small, and even many moderately sized, businesses; all these measures would so is force the kleptomaniacs running Microsoft, Wal-Mart, ExxonMobil, etc. to pay their damned taxes – the horror!

If I can afford to have bastards in Washington confiscate a third of my income and spend it to educate illegal aliens, feed lazy Negroes, and subsidise the businesses of shiftless Hindoos and Chinamen, it's high time the likes of William Gates, Jr. – so keen to foist these invaders upon me and give my patrimony to them – cut back on their mansions and golfing.

When I hear nonsense about what these corporations can and cannot afford I pull their Form 10-Ks. Because unless and until the soundrels in the C-suite are making, oh, I dunno, let's be generous and say $5,000,000.00 annually, then I don't wanna hear about insufficient profits, a need for layoffs and tax-breaks, or any of that other baloney.

And I don't brook the nonsense that all corporate taxes are "double taxation" just because the natural persons owning and operating the corporations are also taxed as individuals. When those natural persons on the boards of directors and in the C-suite become personally – joint and severally – liable for the corporations' actions, we can discuss whether any double-taxation is occurring and any other ways in which the poor corporation is put upon.

‘What would be a better term?’ A better term I can’t think of right now . A better procedure would be to turn those self righteous progressive MFs upside down and shake them until the lint falls out of their pockets . And if they want to leave the country make sure they leave with nothing but a towel wrapped around their bony white asses .

I don't expect him to accomplish everything in two months, but it seems as though things are going a bit off course. I don't feel that we're getting clear communication from the Trump Administration, and things feel disjointed.

Heaven forfend your sense of comfort not be the top priority of the chief executive of the republic and his staff.

Let them leave. If they want to sell their wares to the world's most profitable market, they will pay tariffs like any other foreigner importing things to the U.S.A.

The pretence that no American had gainful employment or otherwise prospered before the rise of the vampire-squid corporatocracy must stop.

They could leave with nothing and would soon create wealth, because they are creators. You, on the other hand, would learn to do without their products and jobs. You think you are entitled to their lives because exactly why . . .

Gates, Bezos, Buffett were not born with billions in their pockets. They may have had access to a few million through family and contacts but lots of people born with a few million never do much with it, let alone provide life enhancing products to people, jobs to tens of thousands of people and wealth to lots of investors and employees. I find it annoying that you think you are entitlds to a big slice of their production because you can demand it.

The business taxes are pertinent to people who create jobs, products and profits. You really think you are entitled to a big slice of that for your health care and retirement?

You really think you are entitled to a big slice of that for your health care and retirement?

That might be arguable.

What is not arguable is that the infrastructure (rule of law, roads, power, water, etc., etc., not to mention the people) is critical to the success of those businesses. It is perfectly reasonable to require them to help pay for it. Let them move to Africa if they want to experience capitalism tooth and claw. I won't cry when some strongman decides to expropriate their assets.

I believe I have a run-of-the-mill autistic libertarian on my hands, but, against my better judgment, I'll bite.

They could leave with nothing and would soon create wealth, because they are creators.

Good for them.

You, on the other hand, would learn to do without their products and jobs.

I already know how to do without them. How about you? Crack shot with a bow and experienced at farming, are you?

You think you are entitled to their lives because exactly why . . .

I think I am entitled to some rich douchenozzle's life because I don't care whether he leaves the U.S.A.? I've advocated slavery now? Brush up on your logic, there, genius. I don't think I'm entitled to anything except being left the Hell alone; your smug, Randian tone suggests you ought to be able to understand that.

The rest of your note goes on and on about your fantasy that I think I am entitled to this, that, and the other, and waxes orgasmic about what titans of productivy and beneficence your heroes Bezos, Warren, and Gates are (risible choices, given your Randian fantasies about self-made men who only had the minor spot of a few millions from daddy; since I achieved my success from homelessness and abuse).

I am entitled to what I earn, take, and make. So far, that's been one Hell of a lot. My healthcare and retirement well and truly secure precisely because I am paid very well for my skills and knowledge.

Your entire reponse suggests you meant to pedantically put an illiterate communist with an IQ of 80 and a net worth of $11.83 in his place.

I don't know who you think you talkin' to. but I'm not him, alright Slim?

Technology (and the collapse of the Soviet Union) created a unique opportunity to arbitrage labor costs in the 3rd world with pre-existing wealth in the 1st i.e. move production to the then poorest places for 3rd world wages but sell the products back to the then richest countries at 1st world prices.

The banking mafia bribed the political-media class into letting them do this and the result is a lot of billionaires, some improvements in the 3rd world and the gradual disintegration of the 1st world as the blood is slowly sucked out of them.

However this model cannot survive long term - it is inherently unstable and can only last while the pre-existing wealth is leeched out of the 1st world countries. When that process is complete the global economy collapses.

So yes no doubt the individuals you named might be millionaires in any environment but they probably wouldn't be billionaires.

I'm not a busybody social engineer; I don't write the kinds of prescriptions you request.

I simply propose corporations and their masters pay taxes commensurate with the public services they enjoy (democratic governance, police, navies, and armies protecting their assets, clean air and water, roads, etc.) same as I do. As res mentioned elsewhere, if they wish to opt out they can set up shop in Libya or Somalia, where no government will bother them, good and hard.

I love your exposure of how Apple plays all the corporate tricks to maximize profits while pretending to be an idealistic, old-hippie company.

Apple has long been the very same Big Brother figure it featured in its its old commercials.

Human nature does not change. Whenever any entity pretends to be better than you -- better than the flawed, clawing, competitive killer that you are -- walk away.

I think that Apple sold their IP to a foreign subsidiary back in the 1980s, when it was worth much less. Maybe they got away with valuing it at less than its fair value, since that can always be argued when it’s not an arm’s-length transaction. But if Apple’s value in its IP, it stands to reason that a company that bought all Apple’s IP rights in the 80s would be earning the bulk of Apple’s profits today.

It could have just as easily gone the other way. Sell your IP, pay US taxes on the gains, and then that IP turns out to be worthless, but you can’t shelter US profits from US tax because the money-losing IP is off shore.

But how do we ensure these corporations will not leave? How does taxing profits on entities do anything positive other resolve a sense of fairness? Logically, couldn't these corporations just relocate all operations abroad? Couldn't they just pass on the taxes to consumers?

I do not know the answer to these questions, but it would seem as though taxation will not work as planned. Perhaps there are more creative methods than blunt taxation to achieve your ends.

Also, remember, once those taxes are passed, that money is going to flow more towards the people you identified. It's not like it will go to rebuilding rural Michigan.

But how do we ensure these corporations will not leave?

That is a great question for a normal country like Jamaica or even Canada. But the USA has the unusual position of being the largest market, or close to the largest now, and corporations will put up with a lot of inconveniencies to be able to do business in it.

Hyper markets like the USA, and China, are able to do things others can’t because of the sheer size of the market. It’s why the Chinese are able to strong arm companies into building factories in China that a country like Canada could never do.

It’s time the USA takes advantage of this natural advantage that we in fact do have almost every other nation in the world.

Taxes should be based on consumption, not production. Beyond a certain level per household, they should be extremely progressive as well. And I don’t give a crap where something was made.

Why should I be punished with higher costs because someone wants to prop up inefficient manufacturing in this country? Let prices reflect the true value of an item and use the tax revenue from above to redistribute income to the workers who would be making these items in this country. I don’t care if they are brown, black or pink. Most government jobs these days seem to me to be a complex redistribution scheme to our less productive members of society. Cut the charade!

But that’s just me. I come to this site for the entertainment and I agree with about half of what Steve writes and 10% of what the commenters write.

An easy way to show that so-called conservatives are just managerial state fluffers is to ask why we even have a corporate income tax at all. Taxes on a C-Corp are just a pass through, paid by employees and customers. The shareholders are not paying these taxes.

Eliminating corporate taxes entirely would go a long way toward restoring economic health and cleaning up corruption in Washington. Most of what politicians do these days is auction off tax breaks to corporate lobbying forms. Get rid of the tax and you get rid of this activity and restore a bit of trust in our political institutions.

That's why it will never happen. The bust-out is all that matters. The so-called Right is just as dirty as the Left. More so as the Left has the ideological ineptitude as an excuse. The so-called conservative claim to know better.

I agree. If there must be taxes, and I reluctantly admit there must be some revenue source for government, it should all be sales-related. All of it. No income, no property, no inheritance, no corporate. All sales.

I don't like the word "borders". It makes my eyes glaze over. Why not use the word tariff?

Or, why not change the rules regarding which corporate tax rates apply to overseas business so that you can't escape U.S. corporate taxes by going overseas? If a company chooses to no longer be an American company in order to sidestep this rule, then impose some kind of penalty for no longer being an American business. It's probably very obvious I'm not familiar with corporate tax rules, but it would be nice to have clearcut rules that make it difficult for corporations and their armies of tax lawyers to game U.S. tax laws.

Tax law is written by lawyers and lobbyists who are in the pocket of their paymasters.
Don’t hold your breath for simplified and “fair” rules.

That is a great question for a normal country like Jamaica or even Canada. But the USA has the unusual position of being the largest market, or close to the largest now, and corporations will put up with a lot of inconveniencies to be able to do business in it.

Hyper markets like the USA, and China, are able to do things others can't because of the sheer size of the market. It's why the Chinese are able to strong arm companies into building factories in China that a country like Canada could never do.

It's time the USA takes advantage of this natural advantage that we in fact do have almost every other nation in the world.

We somewhat already do that with our debt issuance. At some point in time all these special privileges are going to cause us to collapse. It’s an illogical long run proposition from any perspective.

Issuing debt is a separate matter from allowing companies access to our market. Though people have been predicting the demise of the dollar and our ability to issue debt for years, it still hasn't happened. I doubt our consumer market is going to collapse any time soon.

And if the US consumer market did collapse, it would probably take other nations' markets down too. So I don't see a time in my lifetime when the US won't be either the biggest or one of the top markets around. China will probably surpass us. I suppose India has the potential, but they have not achieved anything like the Chinese. And the EU appears to have peaked and is on the verge of becoming smaller.

What other market out there besides China is as enticing as the US market for companies wanting to sell consumer goods?

It's the old use it or lose it notion. We just happen to have a giant consumer market that no global company can really afford to ignore. We might as well use that to our advantage. It's something our ancestors bequeathed to us through their sacrifices.

The tax system is so complex it is impossible to write laws in such a way that smart lawyers cannot game the system. I once worked on an airliner lease deal where the same 747 was considered owned by a Japanese Airline under Japanese Law and by an American Bank under American law. Two companies got to deduct the same airliner. The concept of "income" alone is practically metaphysical. You spend weeks in tax law trying to define income.

The government should run on tariffs, user fees, sale of resources on public land (and the sale of public land to reduce the debt), The USG tolerates titanic inequality and unfairness just because the income tax raises so much revenue. Colleges look at your balance sheet before they price the product - and so does the USG. Price discrimination is a great way to subvert the benefits of supply and demand intersection on price.

The only morally applicable tax on citizens under the precepts of the constitution are property taxes. Of course non-citizens are a whole other story. Plus if Hamilton’s federalist papers arguments are correct the practical, morality is irrelevant here, purpose of America is plutocracy and old money plutocracy at that. Ultimately the tax system should then be made so complex that only connected NY&DC insiders aren’t simply criminalized by it. Which is roughly the current position. Huh, almost as if Steve’s point about all social and political movements for the last several decades being some kind of boon for hustlers has merit.

With this horrorshow, plus the points made earlier about his not doing anything about the H1-B and refugee rackets, even as he obsesses about health insurance and corporate taxes (neither issue was the reason we elected him), I want my money back and a stipend for the work I did to get the rat elected.

He's proving to be just like all the rest. His comparisons of himself to President Jackson are risible, and I think the biggest reason for his venality is to be found therein: Jackson was an orphan who made good and fought for the common man because he was the common man; Trump, despite his affected affinity for the common man, was born with a silver spoon in his ass.

Consider me to have officially disembarked from the train. We have been had.

I feel you are a bit impatient. Understandable, but still impatient. We did not elect Trump as a savior, but as the best weapon available to murder the GOP. If Trump fails, the next guy elected will be several more degrees less polished and several degrees more strident. The Swamp will really hate that.

An immediate end to the abomination known as DACA, an immediate hiatus on the refugee racket to displace the inhabitants of what is left of America (in places like Idaho, Maine, Minnesota, etc., and orders to enforce federal immigration law by deporting anyone and everyone in the U.S.A. illegally should all be fiat accompli by now.

I don't see the impatience in those of us feeling betrayed that instead Trump has chosen to spend vast resources arguing about The Russians!; genuflecting to Negroes about their "historically black colleges" (quaere: why must the rest of us share our historically white ones...?); staging rallies (we elected you, already, go enact your mandate!); and supporting the GOPe's insulting ploy to claw back Obamacare whilst preserving largesse for the porcine insurers (siding with the likes of Paul Ryan over the likes of Rand Paul!); and all the rest of it.

I swear to God, every time I hear the word "Russian" in the news anymore a hemorrhoid forms. As the invasion and destruction of the nation continues apace, Trump foolishly takes the bait to be lured into partisan taunts of neener-neener-boo-boo about "the intelligence community." It's obvious to me, a crippled man in California, the whole thing is a ploy to distract from any meaningful action, but somehow he does not or will not see it from the White House.

I agree he was the last, best hope; so was the Raid of Redeswire, and that's why, to this day, Scotland remains proudly independ...oh...nevermind.

With this horrorshow, plus the points made earlier about his not doing anything about the H1-B and refugee rackets, even as he obsesses about health insurance and corporate taxes (neither issue was the reason we elected him), I want my money back and a stipend for the work I did to get the rat elected.

He's proving to be just like all the rest. His comparisons of himself to President Jackson are risible, and I think the biggest reason for his venality is to be found therein: Jackson was an orphan who made good and fought for the common man because he was the common man; Trump, despite his affected affinity for the common man, was born with a silver spoon in his ass.

Consider me to have officially disembarked from the train. We have been had.

Lmao you were never on the train. You’re another crybaby in a line of crybabies around here who wears out his shoulder patting himself on the back when things are good and then hops into his gimp suit at the slightest headwind.

The Secretary of the Treasury shall evaluate annually the sum of tax revenues not collected from Corporate tax loopholes and shall bill accordingly the writers of the Corporate tax loopholes and the CongressThings that enacted the Corporate loopholes in to law….

I don't expect him to accomplish everything in two months, but it seems as though things are going a bit off course. I don't feel that we're getting clear communication from the Trump Administration, and things feel disjointed.

The problem is Trump can’t just lay out all of his negotiating positions and plans (see his comments on Obama telegraphing US positions when negotiating overseas).

Remember how chaotic his campaign seemed? It’s far too early to be writing him off. I say give him until bad laws actually pass or midterm elections. I think how he plays the midterms will be critical to his success. He really needs more allies in Congress if he wants to get anything done. I also think the threat of taking his complaints to the people for midterms will be a useful cudgel.

They could leave with nothing and would soon create wealth, because they are creators. You, on the other hand, would learn to do without their products and jobs. You think you are entitled to their lives because exactly why . . .

Gates, Bezos, Buffett were not born with billions in their pockets. They may have had access to a few million through family and contacts but lots of people born with a few million never do much with it, let alone provide life enhancing products to people, jobs to tens of thousands of people and wealth to lots of investors and employees. I find it annoying that you think you are entitlds to a big slice of their production because you can demand it.

The business taxes are pertinent to people who create jobs, products and profits. You really think you are entitled to a big slice of that for your health care and retirement?

You really think you are entitled to a big slice of that for your health care and retirement?

That might be arguable.

What is not arguable is that the infrastructure (rule of law, roads, power, water, etc., etc., not to mention the people) is critical to the success of those businesses. It is perfectly reasonable to require them to help pay for it. Let them move to Africa if they want to experience capitalism tooth and claw. I won’t cry when some strongman decides to expropriate their assets.

They could leave with nothing and would soon create wealth, because they are creators. You, on the other hand, would learn to do without their products and jobs. You think you are entitled to their lives because exactly why . . .

Gates, Bezos, Buffett were not born with billions in their pockets. They may have had access to a few million through family and contacts but lots of people born with a few million never do much with it, let alone provide life enhancing products to people, jobs to tens of thousands of people and wealth to lots of investors and employees. I find it annoying that you think you are entitlds to a big slice of their production because you can demand it.

The business taxes are pertinent to people who create jobs, products and profits. You really think you are entitled to a big slice of that for your health care and retirement?

I believe I have a run-of-the-mill autistic libertarian on my hands, but, against my better judgment, I’ll bite.

They could leave with nothing and would soon create wealth, because they are creators.

Good for them.

You, on the other hand, would learn to do without their products and jobs.

I already know how to do without them. How about you? Crack shot with a bow and experienced at farming, are you?

You think you are entitled to their lives because exactly why . . .

I think I am entitled to some rich douchenozzle’s life because I don’t care whether he leaves the U.S.A.? I’ve advocated slavery now? Brush up on your logic, there, genius. I don’t think I’m entitled to anything except being left the Hell alone; your smug, Randian tone suggests you ought to be able to understand that.

The rest of your note goes on and on about your fantasy that I think I am entitled to this, that, and the other, and waxes orgasmic about what titans of productivy and beneficence your heroes Bezos, Warren, and Gates are (risible choices, given your Randian fantasies about self-made men who only had the minor spot of a few millions from daddy; since I achieved my success from homelessness and abuse).

I am entitled to what I earn, take, and make. So far, that’s been one Hell of a lot. My healthcare and retirement well and truly secure precisely because I am paid very well for my skills and knowledge.

Your entire reponse suggests you meant to pedantically put an illiterate communist with an IQ of 80 and a net worth of $11.83 in his place.

I don’t know who you think you talkin’ to. but I’m not him, alright Slim?

Goldman Sachs has hijacked the Trump revolution. We will see to just what extent when Trump meets with Xi. Trump just tweeted a hardball warning about the meeting.

Trump doesn’t have a real trade rep in place yet. For now it’s effectively Cohn. Globalist Cohn loves the status quo. Goldman loves the status quo. Let’s see who represents us against China …campaign trail Trump or white house Trump.

I’m not a busybody social engineer; I don’t write the kinds of prescriptions you request.

I simply propose corporations and their masters pay taxes commensurate with the public services they enjoy (democratic governance, police, navies, and armies protecting their assets, clean air and water, roads, etc.) same as I do. As res mentioned elsewhere, if they wish to opt out they can set up shop in Libya or Somalia, where no government will bother them, good and hard.

Most of the government, including the military, is just a welfare and jobs program for its employees, servicemen, and contractors. Ultimately, what you just want is the government to shake down corporations out of spite and envy. Nothing wrong with that - those are normal human emotions and motivations. But the rationalization you make about it being about "roads", which is the same sort that liberals make, is just laughable.

Give me a goddam break with this nonsense. People like you start up everytime corporate welfare and corporations' tax evasion are mentioned, and you pretend as though Ma's Diner and Pa's Garage are being hounded and bankrupted by The Man.

Of all things, taxing imports (just as nearly every other sane nation does; cf. regulating immigration) and clawing back taxes avoided via shady international structuring shenanigans have negligible effects on small, and even many moderately sized, businesses; all these measures would so is force the kleptomaniacs running Microsoft, Wal-Mart, ExxonMobil, etc. to pay their damned taxes – the horror!

If I can afford to have bastards in Washington confiscate a third of my income and spend it to educate illegal aliens, feed lazy Negroes, and subsidise the businesses of shiftless Hindoos and Chinamen, it's high time the likes of William Gates, Jr. – so keen to foist these invaders upon me and give my patrimony to them – cut back on their mansions and golfing.

When I hear nonsense about what these corporations can and cannot afford I pull their Form 10-Ks. Because unless and until the soundrels in the C-suite are making, oh, I dunno, let's be generous and say $5,000,000.00 annually, then I don't wanna hear about insufficient profits, a need for layoffs and tax-breaks, or any of that other baloney.

And I don't brook the nonsense that all corporate taxes are "double taxation" just because the natural persons owning and operating the corporations are also taxed as individuals. When those natural persons on the boards of directors and in the C-suite become personally – joint and severally – liable for the corporations' actions, we can discuss whether any double-taxation is occurring and any other ways in which the poor corporation is put upon.

Nicely done. Can’t stand the ancaps who try and ride the tailcoats of every nationalist movement and subvert it with this “open borders are okay as long as it’s business instead of a government running our country into the ground.”

We somewhat already do that with our debt issuance. At some point in time all these special privileges are going to cause us to collapse. It's an illogical long run proposition from any perspective.

Issuing debt is a separate matter from allowing companies access to our market. Though people have been predicting the demise of the dollar and our ability to issue debt for years, it still hasn’t happened. I doubt our consumer market is going to collapse any time soon.

And if the US consumer market did collapse, it would probably take other nations’ markets down too. So I don’t see a time in my lifetime when the US won’t be either the biggest or one of the top markets around. China will probably surpass us. I suppose India has the potential, but they have not achieved anything like the Chinese. And the EU appears to have peaked and is on the verge of becoming smaller.

What other market out there besides China is as enticing as the US market for companies wanting to sell consumer goods?

It’s the old use it or lose it notion. We just happen to have a giant consumer market that no global company can really afford to ignore. We might as well use that to our advantage. It’s something our ancestors bequeathed to us through their sacrifices.

I disagree. Issuing debt is superficially separate from this issue but it is indicative of the broader issue. That problem is complete disregard for the slow mill of grinding economic reality. Perpetually floating massive budget deficits for funding wars abroad, paying for low IQ people to breed, forcing legacy populations into second class citizen status and spending on conspicuous consumption is the road to ruin. Adding more puzzling economic decisions like this increases the eventual banquet of consequences.

Again, what are the benefits of actually passing this tax? What would actually occur? Perhaps we get more money from Apple or GE but then all those jobs slowly start being carried off. And that money we gain only goes towards more low-end populations increasing. Maybe the smart fraction begins to leave as well - why remain under such burdensome expenses that accompany eternal race guilt and original sin?

Why stay here as increasingly huge benefits are bestowed by race/ethnicity as the institutions of law and order crumble under the tide of ethnic grievance?

Our nation state has deteriorated to such an extent that foreign nationals violently attack political rallies while waiving foreign flags. The only positive aspect of America that remains is its economic freedom.

Perhaps in the past, American nationalism could seed the willingness to bear economic sacrifice for the common good and the republic. But the left and rapacious neo-right has dismantled the institutions that create a sense of national identity.

All that is left is economic benefit. Take that away and all we have left is Burma with Mexicans.

But how do we ensure these corporations will not leave? How does taxing profits on entities do anything positive other resolve a sense of fairness? Logically, couldn't these corporations just relocate all operations abroad? Couldn't they just pass on the taxes to consumers?

I do not know the answer to these questions, but it would seem as though taxation will not work as planned. Perhaps there are more creative methods than blunt taxation to achieve your ends.

Also, remember, once those taxes are passed, that money is going to flow more towards the people you identified. It's not like it will go to rebuilding rural Michigan.

We hit them with a suitable penalty for leaving, enough so that it will be more profitable for them to stay here than relocate.

Paying taxes is not going to be harder than facing a 75% punitive offshoring tariff.

You want access to our market? You pay for it by following our rules. We’re not a third world country like Venezuela, where such a threat could be laughed off because there’s no actual market power behind it. We control one of the world’s largest markets in virtually all products.

We have enormous leverage we can apply – and they know it. That’s why we’ll rarely have to use it once we’ve made a couple of examples.

I'm not a busybody social engineer; I don't write the kinds of prescriptions you request.

I simply propose corporations and their masters pay taxes commensurate with the public services they enjoy (democratic governance, police, navies, and armies protecting their assets, clean air and water, roads, etc.) same as I do. As res mentioned elsewhere, if they wish to opt out they can set up shop in Libya or Somalia, where no government will bother them, good and hard.

Most of the government, including the military, is just a welfare and jobs program for its employees, servicemen, and contractors. Ultimately, what you just want is the government to shake down corporations out of spite and envy. Nothing wrong with that – those are normal human emotions and motivations. But the rationalization you make about it being about “roads”, which is the same sort that liberals make, is just laughable.

Here's an abject lesson in what happens to the John Galts running outfits like Chevron when unproductive whiners like me aren't around wearing uniforms to enforce property rights.

This is the Doing Business In... series, intelligence and measurements relied upon by large corporations and their lawyers (hi there!) to make decisions about whether and where to – wait for it – do business. One of the most important indices (probably the single most important) is the stability of the government and the protection of property rights.

Building roads is the least important thing the Seabees and the army's Corps of Engineers do to protect and advance the interests of large corporations doing business in the U.S.A.

People dismiss the import of governmental forces to keep the peace and defend property rights because long usage cause those people to grow complacent and take civilisation for granted. A trip to Lagos would do such people good.

People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf. – Who The Heck Knows Anymore?

I feel you are a bit impatient. Understandable, but still impatient. We did not elect Trump as a savior, but as the best weapon available to murder the GOP. If Trump fails, the next guy elected will be several more degrees less polished and several degrees more strident. The Swamp will really hate that.

An immediate end to the abomination known as DACA, an immediate hiatus on the refugee racket to displace the inhabitants of what is left of America (in places like Idaho, Maine, Minnesota, etc., and orders to enforce federal immigration law by deporting anyone and everyone in the U.S.A. illegally should all be fiat accompli by now.

I don’t see the impatience in those of us feeling betrayed that instead Trump has chosen to spend vast resources arguing about The Russians!; genuflecting to Negroes about their “historically black colleges” (quaere: why must the rest of us share our historically white ones…?); staging rallies (we elected you, already, go enact your mandate!); and supporting the GOPe’s insulting ploy to claw back Obamacare whilst preserving largesse for the porcine insurers (siding with the likes of Paul Ryan over the likes of Rand Paul!); and all the rest of it.

I swear to God, every time I hear the word “Russian” in the news anymore a hemorrhoid forms. As the invasion and destruction of the nation continues apace, Trump foolishly takes the bait to be lured into partisan taunts of neener-neener-boo-boo about “the intelligence community.” It’s obvious to me, a crippled man in California, the whole thing is a ploy to distract from any meaningful action, but somehow he does not or will not see it from the White House.

I agree he was the last, best hope; so was the Raid of Redeswire, and that’s why, to this day, Scotland remains proudly independ…oh…nevermind.

I believe I have a run-of-the-mill autistic libertarian on my hands, but, against my better judgment, I'll bite.

They could leave with nothing and would soon create wealth, because they are creators.

Good for them.

You, on the other hand, would learn to do without their products and jobs.

I already know how to do without them. How about you? Crack shot with a bow and experienced at farming, are you?

You think you are entitled to their lives because exactly why . . .

I think I am entitled to some rich douchenozzle's life because I don't care whether he leaves the U.S.A.? I've advocated slavery now? Brush up on your logic, there, genius. I don't think I'm entitled to anything except being left the Hell alone; your smug, Randian tone suggests you ought to be able to understand that.

The rest of your note goes on and on about your fantasy that I think I am entitled to this, that, and the other, and waxes orgasmic about what titans of productivy and beneficence your heroes Bezos, Warren, and Gates are (risible choices, given your Randian fantasies about self-made men who only had the minor spot of a few millions from daddy; since I achieved my success from homelessness and abuse).

I am entitled to what I earn, take, and make. So far, that's been one Hell of a lot. My healthcare and retirement well and truly secure precisely because I am paid very well for my skills and knowledge.

Your entire reponse suggests you meant to pedantically put an illiterate communist with an IQ of 80 and a net worth of $11.83 in his place.

I don't know who you think you talkin' to. but I'm not him, alright Slim?

You’re a lawyer and thus a rent-seeker. Naturally your instinct is to side with other rent-seekers to shake down enterprise.

Most of the government, including the military, is just a welfare and jobs program for its employees, servicemen, and contractors. Ultimately, what you just want is the government to shake down corporations out of spite and envy. Nothing wrong with that - those are normal human emotions and motivations. But the rationalization you make about it being about "roads", which is the same sort that liberals make, is just laughable.

Here’s an abject lesson in what happens to the John Galts running outfits like Chevron when unproductive whiners like me aren’t around wearing uniforms to enforce property rights.

This is the Doing Business In… series, intelligence and measurements relied upon by large corporations and their lawyers (hi there!) to make decisions about whether and where to – wait for it – do business. One of the most important indices (probably the single most important) is the stability of the government and the protection of property rights.

Building roads is the least important thing the Seabees and the army’s Corps of Engineers do to protect and advance the interests of large corporations doing business in the U.S.A.

People dismiss the import of governmental forces to keep the peace and defend property rights because long usage cause those people to grow complacent and take civilisation for granted. A trip to Lagos would do such people good.

People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf. – Who The Heck Knows Anymore?

Precedents associated with the term aside, a Value Added Tax sounds like what we want.

They could leave with nothing and would soon create wealth, because they are creators. You, on the other hand, would learn to do without their products and jobs. You think you are entitled to their lives because exactly why . . .

This is immaterial. I don’t want business to be able to use foreign labor in slave markets, to sell to domestic consumers in free markets. We make sacrifices here to protect our workers, and add value to our country. I don’t see why others who aren’t making any sacrifices or adding any value should be allowed to enrich themselves. Tax them to make up the difference.

Taxes should be based on consumption, not production. Beyond a certain level per household, they should be extremely progressive as well. And I don’t give a crap where something was made.

I’m never going to agree to that last bit. It’s a recipe for a race to the bottom: “We can’t compete unless we end all labor laws and regulation, and stop making such a nice country!” It’s lunacy.

Why should I be punished with higher costs because someone wants to prop up inefficient manufacturing in this country?

One man’s inefficiency is another man’s high standard of living, I guess.

Let prices reflect the true value of an item

Now you’re contradicting yourself. Make up your mind already.

Most of the government, including the military, is just a welfare and jobs program for its employees, servicemen, and contractors. Ultimately, what you just want is the government to shake down corporations out of spite and envy. Nothing wrong with that – those are normal human emotions and motivations. But the rationalization you make about it being about “roads”, which is the same sort that liberals make, is just laughable.

All of which ignores the incentivization of offshoring, which you’re promoting.

You libertardians are essentially hostile to Nations, but most people are not.

With this horrorshow, plus the points made earlier about his not doing anything about the H1-B and refugee rackets, even as he obsesses about health insurance and corporate taxes (neither issue was the reason we elected him), I want my money back and a stipend for the work I did to get the rat elected.

He's proving to be just like all the rest. His comparisons of himself to President Jackson are risible, and I think the biggest reason for his venality is to be found therein: Jackson was an orphan who made good and fought for the common man because he was the common man; Trump, despite his affected affinity for the common man, was born with a silver spoon in his ass.

Consider me to have officially disembarked from the train. We have been had.

Consider me to have officially disembarked from the train. We have been had.

For someone as bright as you, I am surprised to see you miss the point. Whatever stupidity Trump foists upon us, (and it will come) he kicked out the props under the Potemkin village the establishment constructed. Their charade, even if they coopt Trump, will never be the same. And someone else will notice the opportunity, and seize it.

Trump’s flaws are great. And he may do no more good than he has up until now. But his immigration EO’s unmasked the judiciary. There will be a price for them to pay. And others will notice.

Don’t expect too much from Trump. Be glad for the good he has already done. And when Bannon leaves, or is fired, you will know Trump’s corruption has been completed.

If we are going to fantasize, I’d go one step further – let’s hope that other developed nations begin to recognize that scarcity is no longer the overriding economic problem in the 21st century. Let’s revise the WTO to recognize the value of autarky and economic diversity within a given country. Just as nations can respect each other’s borders, we can respect each other’s tariffs as well, and recognize that neither our emigrants nor our exporters have any divine right to settle nor sell in other countries.

In short, in a sane world, none of this needs to be hostile. Trade agreements need not be suicide pacts.

…the Administration is going to admit 900 refugees a week for the remainder of the fiscal year which ends September 30th…As of yesterday, that would mean that 62,482 could be the expected total. The average since 9/11 has been around 64,000.

That’s roughly a city the size of Iowa City, Iowa every year of 3rd-world “refugees” being brought to the US at taxpayer expense.

Issuing debt is a separate matter from allowing companies access to our market. Though people have been predicting the demise of the dollar and our ability to issue debt for years, it still hasn't happened. I doubt our consumer market is going to collapse any time soon.

And if the US consumer market did collapse, it would probably take other nations' markets down too. So I don't see a time in my lifetime when the US won't be either the biggest or one of the top markets around. China will probably surpass us. I suppose India has the potential, but they have not achieved anything like the Chinese. And the EU appears to have peaked and is on the verge of becoming smaller.

What other market out there besides China is as enticing as the US market for companies wanting to sell consumer goods?

It's the old use it or lose it notion. We just happen to have a giant consumer market that no global company can really afford to ignore. We might as well use that to our advantage. It's something our ancestors bequeathed to us through their sacrifices.

I disagree. Issuing debt is superficially separate from this issue but it is indicative of the broader issue. That problem is complete disregard for the slow mill of grinding economic reality. Perpetually floating massive budget deficits for funding wars abroad, paying for low IQ people to breed, forcing legacy populations into second class citizen status and spending on conspicuous consumption is the road to ruin. Adding more puzzling economic decisions like this increases the eventual banquet of consequences.

Again, what are the benefits of actually passing this tax? What would actually occur? Perhaps we get more money from Apple or GE but then all those jobs slowly start being carried off. And that money we gain only goes towards more low-end populations increasing. Maybe the smart fraction begins to leave as well – why remain under such burdensome expenses that accompany eternal race guilt and original sin?

Why stay here as increasingly huge benefits are bestowed by race/ethnicity as the institutions of law and order crumble under the tide of ethnic grievance?

Our nation state has deteriorated to such an extent that foreign nationals violently attack political rallies while waiving foreign flags. The only positive aspect of America that remains is its economic freedom.

Perhaps in the past, American nationalism could seed the willingness to bear economic sacrifice for the common good and the republic. But the left and rapacious neo-right has dismantled the institutions that create a sense of national identity.

All that is left is economic benefit. Take that away and all we have left is Burma with Mexicans.

When Microsoft was in its early days, it really did sell most of its software on discs instead of via online downloads. Those came later. So they could legitimately claim to be manufacturing something. Once you set up as an X-type of company for tax purposes, it's kind of hard to change it down the line. Since the original method also is cheaper for Microsoft, they have no incentive to change it.

It's also true that there vast numbers of Americans who may not own Microsoft stock directly, but who have it as part of their employer-sponsored pension plans. If Microsoft made less money because of higher taxes, its share value would drop, and this would cause a proportionate drop in the value of those pensions. Likewise, the value of those pensions has grown over the last thirty years because they include tech stocks like Microsoft, Apple, etc. If pensions today consisted mainly of stocks in older companies like Sears or Westinghouse (which are heading into bankruptcy) or gas and oil stocks (which have gone downhill badly), or 30-year Treasury bonds paying out 1%, (which is a horrible rate that has not a prayer of keeping up with inflation), they would be in really bad shape.

The thirty-year boom in the tech sector has helped keep America's middle- and upper-middle classes out of the poor house in its old age. This would not have happened if we had taxed those companies to death. In economics, you can't tug on one portion of the economy without causing a cascade of effects to appear elsewhere, and many of these effects are almost completely hidden from sight. Liberal economists certainly don't know much about them. In economics, you don't kill the goose that lays the golden egg with excess taxes.

Besides, why should anybody, whether a person or a company, have to pay higher taxes? We have an inefficient and spendthrift government that pays for many programs we don't need. That money is put to better use in our own pockets rather than doing things like paying large salaries to corrupt, third-world nepotistic UN members, or helping put a roof on some town hall in Outer Mongolia, or helping subsidize the 10th child of some black drug addict.

The thirty-year boom in the tech sector has helped keep America’s middle- and upper-middle classes out of the poor house in its old age.

Which poor house, the original one in Jersey or the second one in Naples?

Democrats always like to call things fair. Mentally it's very effective and disarming. The government isn't stealing from you and coercing you, they are just making things fair. Border Fairness Tax - BFT.

They could leave with nothing and would soon create wealth, because they are creators. You, on the other hand, would learn to do without their products and jobs. You think you are entitled to their lives because exactly why . . .

Gates, Bezos, Buffett were not born with billions in their pockets. They may have had access to a few million through family and contacts but lots of people born with a few million never do much with it, let alone provide life enhancing products to people, jobs to tens of thousands of people and wealth to lots of investors and employees. I find it annoying that you think you are entitlds to a big slice of their production because you can demand it.

The business taxes are pertinent to people who create jobs, products and profits. You really think you are entitled to a big slice of that for your health care and retirement?

They could leave with nothing and would soon create wealth,

Technology (and the collapse of the Soviet Union) created a unique opportunity to arbitrage labor costs in the 3rd world with pre-existing wealth in the 1st i.e. move production to the then poorest places for 3rd world wages but sell the products back to the then richest countries at 1st world prices.

The banking mafia bribed the political-media class into letting them do this and the result is a lot of billionaires, some improvements in the 3rd world and the gradual disintegration of the 1st world as the blood is slowly sucked out of them.

However this model cannot survive long term – it is inherently unstable and can only last while the pre-existing wealth is leeched out of the 1st world countries. When that process is complete the global economy collapses.

So yes no doubt the individuals you named might be millionaires in any environment but they probably wouldn’t be billionaires.

Taxes should be based on consumption, not production. Beyond a certain level per household, they should be extremely progressive as well. And I don't give a crap where something was made.

Why should I be punished with higher costs because someone wants to prop up inefficient manufacturing in this country? Let prices reflect the true value of an item and use the tax revenue from above to redistribute income to the workers who would be making these items in this country. I don't care if they are brown, black or pink. Most government jobs these days seem to me to be a complex redistribution scheme to our less productive members of society. Cut the charade!

But that's just me. I come to this site for the entertainment and I agree with about half of what Steve writes and 10% of what the commenters write.

Why should I be punished with higher costs because someone wants to prop up inefficient manufacturing in this country?

Because the internal logic of capitalism leads to economic collapse.

Driving wages to subsistence makes perfect sense for an individual firm but disaster if they all do it.

The only people who can’t see this after it is explained are greedy sociopaths.

Contact Steve Sailer

Email me at SteveSlr *at* aol*dot*com (make the obvious substitutions between the asterisks; you don’t have to capitalize an email address, I just included the capitals to make clear the logic — it’s my name without a space and without the vowels in “Sailer” that give so many people, especially irate commenters, trouble.)

iSteve Panhandling

Steve Sailer

I always appreciate my readers’ help, especially monetary. Here’s how you can help:

First: You can use PayPal (non-tax deductible) by going to the page on my old blog here. PayPal accepts most credit cards. Contributions can be either one-time only, monthly, or annual.

Second: You can mail a non-tax deductible donation to:

Steve Sailer
P.O Box 4142
Valley Village, CA 91617-0142

Third: You can make a tax deductible contribution via VDARE by clicking here. (Paypal and credit cards accepted, including recurring “subscription” donations.) Note: the VDARE site goes up and down on its own schedule, so if this link stops working, please let me know.

The IRS has issued instructions regarding Bitcoins. I’m having Coinbase immediately turn all Bitcoins I receive into U.S. dollars and deposit them in my bank account. At the end of the year, Coinbase will presumably send me a 1099 form for filing my taxes.

Payments are not tax deductible.

Below are links to two Coinbase pages of mine. This first is if you want to enter a U.S. dollar-denominated amount to pay me.

Fifth: if you have a Wells Fargo bank account, you can transfer money to me (with no fees) via Wells Fargo SurePay. Just tell WF SurePay to send the money to my ancient AOL email address steveslrAT aol.com — replace the AT with the usual @). (Non-tax deductible.) There is no 2.9% fee like with PayPal or Google Wallet, so this is good for large contributions.

Sixth: if you have a Chase bank account (or even other bank accounts), you can transfer money to me (with no fees) via Chase QuickPay (FAQ). Just tell Chase QuickPay to send the money to my ancient AOL email address (steveslrATaol.com — replace the AT with the usual @). If Chase asks for the name on my account, it’s StevenSailer with an n at the end of Steven. (Non-tax deductible.) There is no 2.9% fee like with PayPal or Google Wallet, so this is good for large contributions.

Here’s the Google Wallet FAQ. From it: “You will need to have (or sign up for) Google Wallet to send or receive money. If you have ever purchased anything on Google Play, then you most likely already have a Google Wallet. If you do not yet have a Google Wallet, don’t worry, the process is simple: go to wallet.google.com and follow the steps.” You probably already have a Google ID and password, which Google Wallet uses, so signing up Wallet is pretty painless.

You can put money into your Google Wallet Balance from your bank account and send it with no service fee.

Google Wallet works from both a website and a smartphoneapp (Android and iPhone — the Google Wallet app is currently available only in the U.S., but the Google Wallet website can be used in 160 countries).

Or, once you sign up with Google Wallet, you can simply send money via credit card, bank transfer, or Wallet Balance as an attachment from Google’s free Gmail email service. Here’s how to do it.